hiroshima and nagasaki effects evidence, debunking propaganda and radiophobia

12/08/2015 Hiroshima and Nagasaki anti-nuclear propaganda debunked by the hard facts

http://glasstone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/capabilities-of-nuclear-weapons.html 1/129

Declassified effects of nuclear weapons and countermeasures

Protection is needed against collateral civilian damage and contamination in conventional, chemical and nuclear attack, with credible

low yield clean nuclear deterrence against conventional warfare which, in reality (not science fiction) costs far more lives. Anti scientific

media, who promulgate and exploit terrorism for profit, censor (1) vital, effective civil defense knowledge and (2) effective, safe, low yield

air burst clean weapons like the Mk54 and W79 which deter conventional warfare and escalation, allowing arms negotiations from a

position of strength. This helped end the Cold War in the 1980s. Opposing civil defense and nuclear weapons that really deter

conventional war, is complacent and dangerous.

Hiroshima's air raid shelters were unoccupied beca...

In 1,881 burns cases in Hiroshima, only 17 (or 0.9...

Dr Harold L. Brodes new book, Nuclear Weapons in ...

800 war migrants drowned on 22 April by EU policy:...

Photographed fireball shielding by cloud cover in ...

Nuclear weapons effects "firestorm" and "nuclear w...

Proved 97.5% survival in completely demolished hou...

Archives

March 2006

April 2006

May 2006

June 2006

August 2006

October 2006

November 2006

December 2006

January 2007

March 2007

May 2008

July 2008

November 2008



Monday, July 13, 2015

Hiroshima's air raid shelters were unoccupied because Japanese Army officers were having breakfast when B29s were detectedfar away, says Yoshie Oka, the operator of the Hiroshima air raid sirens on 6 August 1945

December 2008

February 2009

April 2009

August 2009

September 2009

October 2009

November 2009

February 2010

March 2010

April 2010

May 2010

September 2010

October 2010

January 2011

March 2011

April 2011

May 2011

September 2011

November 2011

December 2011

November 2012

March 2013

June 2013

July 2013

August 2013

October 2013

February 2014

March 2014

April 2014

May 2014

August 2014

December 2014

January 2015

April 2015

May 2015

June 2015

July 2015



Bigger bombs produce fewer blast and thermal casualties per ton of TNT energy because you have more time to duck and cover at the radius of devastation and because of the scaling

laws: actual casualty data proves this. Simple civil defense reduces casualties still further, and nuclear radiation is shielded by modern city buildings.



Above: benefits objective scientific comparisons of Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear war survivors to an unexposed control group with similar

diagnosis methods (which wasn't done after Chernobyl or any other radiation propaganda study, in which natural cancers were reported as radiation

effects) proves that overall, the nuclear radiation exposure increased survival and lifespan. Dr Sanders in his 2010 book Radiation Hormesis and the

Linear No Threshold Assumption, has disproved the LNT (linear no threshold) propaganda by objective human and animal radiation effects data.

Review of documentary, Hiroshima: the aftermath, UK Channel 5 TV, 6 July 2015, 8pm (online here)

This documentary is very important because it proves the reason why no final air raid warning was given in Hiroshima, by interviewing the military personnel in charge

of air raid warnings both in Tokyo (by radio identification of B29 call signs) and in Hiroshima's main military base, particularly Yoshie Oka, a female army B29 tracker

based in the military bunker at Hiroshima Castle, near ground zero. Hiroshima and Nagasaki both had enough air raid shelters for the people, which

remained intact and shielded most of the radiation, but only 400 of the more than 70,000 shelter places in Nagasaki were occupied, and a similar

situation occurred for Hiroshima. Thus, the failure of the warning system in the surprise attack caused the casualties.



Above: it is a myth that the holocaust in World War II was that done to the unwarned populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 and 9 August 1945. This Daily Express Giles drawing

was published on 3 February 1944, showing that atrocities during CONVENTIONAL warfare were occurring long before August 1945, killing MORE people despite less apparent

"violence": e.g. starvation and disease of Anne Frank and others in concentration camps or gas chambers, and in Japanese forced labour camps, and human experimentation on prisoners of

war. (Note that Giles was NOT sitting in an armchair located out of harms way but was of course actually in the thick of the war, as Captain in the Coldstream Guards, sent to record the

devastation of conventional warfare in the devastating battle Arnhem. For more about his wartime work, see Giles at War by P. Tory, 1994.) Churchill approved nuclear attacks on

Hiroshima and Nagasaki.



Facts debunk a popular myth that Oppenheimer didn't know anything about radiation hazards. He specifically used the neutron bomb effect in 1945. Sam Cohen, who worked in the Manhattan project, later developed the idea into a clear bomb to deter tank and

infantry street fighting in modern concrete cities, to prevent conventional war, saving many millions of deaths. Propaganda from Russian comrades against the neutron bomb was never seriously opposed by the Pentagon, so conventional war is not credibly deterred

today. (Oppenheimer agreed with a suggestion from Kenneth Bainbridge after the Trinity test on 16 July 1945 that "Now we are all so [expletives deleted]", which sought to spread the blame around to everyone, even though Edward Teller had urged

Oppenheimer unsuccessfully to have a demonstration test before the Japanese, before dropping the bomb on a city. Oppenheimer simply told him scientists should stay out of "politics" and "war", and refused to circulate the petition which Teller showed him.

illiberal, conservative hypocrisy of Oppenheimer is testified by Feynman and Feynman's sponsor Freeman Dyson, who was abused verbally by Oppenheimer for daring to advocate non-orthodox but correct relativistic quantum mechanics,

the path integral multipath interference mechanism for quantum field theory, where vacuum particles constitute a non-classical Coulomb field that create atomic electron position indeterminancy by discrete, random, stochastic, interactions

represented by Feynman diagrams. Sam Cohen also explains that Oppenheimer was an irrational bully, a cruel self-obsessed egotist (you probably have to be such a person to be a "leader" of politics-physics, simply to climb the greasy pole of hypocrisy,

obfuscation and corruption in today's mainstream physics which is a dogmatic cult valuing consensus and voting far more than free interpretation of the factual evidence). The problems with Teller's idea to demonstrate a bomb by exploding one in Tokyo bay were

the kind of practical matters that Teller always avoided or messed up. (The detailed design for the first H bomb was done by Richard Garwin, not Teller and certainly not Ulam who merely suggested using a fission bomb to compress

than using TNT.) A 1 ton TNT explosion 0.1 mile away gives similar pressure and visual effects to 1 kiloton at 1 mile or 1 megaton at 10 miles. That's cube-root scaling: the peak pressure (about 1 psi) and blast wind speed (40 miles/hour) is the same in each

case, so the only thing that distinguishes the three events for an observer is that the effects occur quicker for the smaller explosions (blast arrives at 0.4 seconds for 0.1 mile from 1 ton TNT, 4 seconds for 1 mile from 1 kiloton, and 40 seconds for 10 miles from 1



megaton). Teller completely misunderstands the Hiroshima firestorm effect in his 1962 book The Legacy of Hiroshima, which is probably typical of nuclear warhead designers who with the exception of former LANL Director Harold Agnew, do not care about

the actual physics of nuclear weapons effects or data from Hiroshima, just like most "nuclear historians" who preserve a dangerous secrecy!)

I knew [Stalins spy Dr Klaus] Fuchs, who was in my division [at Los Alamos in WWII], but only slightly, which undoubtedly was the way he wanted most people to

know him. His assignment was to calculate how the high explosive system that detonated the Nagasaki bomb (the one I worked on) should be designed. it was

Fuchs turn to give a seminar. Oppenheimer not only found time to attend but was so fascinated with what Fuchs had to say that he stayed throughout his recitation.

When Fuchs had finished, Oppenheimer got up and praised him to high heaven to expose another side of Oppenheimers personality, which could be

intolerant and downright sadistic, he showed up at a seminar to hear Dick Erlich, a very bright young physicist with a terrible stuttering problem, which

got even worse when he became nervous. Poor Dick, who was having a hard enough time at the blackboard explaining his equations, went into a state

of panic when Oppenheimer walked in unexpectedly. His stuttering became pathetic, but with one exception everyone loyally stayed on trying to

decipher what he was trying to say. This exception was Oppenheimer, who sat there for a few minutes, then got up and said to Dick: You know, were

all cleared to know what youre doing, so why dont you tell us.

With that he left,

leaving Dick absolutely devastated and unable to continue. Also devastated were the rest of us Fuchs finally was caught and sent to prison in England

I think he should have been shot American commies, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg getting atomic bomb secrets during the war from Ethels brother David

Greenglass, an Army enlisted man at Los Alamos who was in my barracks and whom I knew somewhat should have been executed for treason, but Greenglass, a

real loyal family type more than willing to rat on his own sister, copped a plea by helping the government prosecute her and her husband and send them off to the

electric chair, Greenglass got away with murder and received a relatively light jail sentence.

- Samuel T. Cohen, Confessions of the Father of the Neutron Bomb, pp. 24-25. (Emphasis added.)

I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds. I suppose we all thought that, one way or another.

J. R. Oppenheimer, filmed wiping away crocodile tears in the 1965 TV show, The Decision to Drop the Bomb (Emphasis added to all, an effort to spread blame

on everyone, despite the disagreement of others, like Edward Teller, that he doesn't mention. Teller testified Oppenheimer was hard to understand.)



Air raid sirens had been sounded hours earlier when the Hiroshima mission weather survey plane (flying far ahead of the bomb carrying Enola Gay) flew over

Hiroshima, but that was a false alarm. Some have speculated that no effort to give another air raid alarm was made when the final three B29s appeared - the Enola

Gay with the bomb, a blast measurement plane which dropped parachute-delivered radio-telemetry blast pressure gauges (because nobody had ever tested the gun

type Hiroshima bomb unlike the implosion Nagasaki weapon to measure the yield), and another plane lingering behind with British and other observers - because of

this "crying wolf" effect. But this is simply not true. Many people were travelling outdoors, and school children were in work parties clearing firebreaks outdoors, at

8:15am when the Hiroshima explosion occurred.

In modern cities, all concrete buildings offer good radiation and blast shelter, unlike the predominant wooden houses of Hiroshima. In Pacific nuclear tests,

concrete buildings with simple earth buttressing survived close proximity to the biggest American multi-megaton thermonuclear weapons ever made.

Yoshie Oka, who is still alive, explained that she tracked the final B29s and sent a message to higher authority in good time, but no order came back to sound the air



raid alarm until 8:13am, just two minutes before the explosion, because the officers were all having breakfast at the same time and nobody was on hand to

immediately order the air raid sirens! When she was given the order, she was unable to put the authorization code into the air raid siren system before the flash of the

bomb came through the window. Therefore, it was an air raid blunder that prevented people taking shelters in Hiroshima.

Naturally, following politically-correct CND type propaganda, the survival possibilities from the simple but effective air raid shelters was ignored in the Channel 5

program, which tried to contrast the American celebrations of Japanese surrender with the misery of the people burned outdoors in Hiroshima. It also obfuscated the

mechanisms and time scales for mortality, claiming initially that the population was "instantly" vaporised, then at 11 minutes 9 seconds into the program claiming they

died in "five seconds" before finally declaring at the end that they died over many decades. The reality is that blast injuries killed within a few days, while

thermal and nuclear radiation killed on average within a month, as the official detailed Japanese study confirmed: fires started in now-obsolete city

wooden houses with charcoal braziers that were overturned by blast, along with paper screens etc, not due to thermal radiation which did not start the

firestorm in Hiroshima (click here). (Direct link to Japanese graph of casualty rate versus time, here. From a few days after the bombing onwards, the local

newspapers like the Hiroshima Chugoku Shimbun restarted, and published daily casualty lists, so there is extensive data available on casualty versus time for different

kinds of buildings, as shown in the Dirkwood report on 35,000 Hiroshima and Nagasaki casualties which uses the Hiroshima USSBS building index linked

here.)

The low incidence of predicted indoor ignitions results from the low elevation angle of the fireball. The artificial horizon of trees and buildings obscures the fireball from

most residential windows ... the average elevation angle of the artificial horizon is about 6 degrees for New Orleans.

- Philip J. Dolan, editor, CAPABILITIES OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS, 1972, classified secret restricted data, chapter 11, Damage to Structures, thermal radiation

fire predictions.

The intensity of a large fire depends, in part, on the average amount of combustible material per unit area. In Hamburg, where 45 percent of the firestorm area was

covered by buildings containing about 70 lbs/ft2 of fuel, the average loading was 32 lbs/ft2. A strong firestorm was produced in the area from the World War II

incendiary bomb raid. In Hiroshima the average fuel loading [for the firestorm area] is estimated to have been 8 lbs/ft2. [In typical American surburbs the fuel loading is

just 10-24 kg/m2, according to the 1979 U.S. Office of Technology Assessment report The Effects of Nuclear War, which vastly exaggerates blast, thermal radiation,

and nuclear radiation effects by ignoring Dolan, despite access to classified data.]

- Philip J. Dolan, editor, CAPABILITIES OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS, 1972, originally classified secret restricted data, chapter 11, Damage to Structures, page 11-

143.

Only massive overdoses of radiation can cause cancer or other injury: smaller doses unbind anti-cancer P53 from its MDM2 inhibitor, increasing anti-

cancer DNA repair enzyme metabolism and lifespan:



Chernobyl's 1.8 mR/hour = 0.018 mSv/hour = 18 microSieverts/hour, in the hormesis range, with reduced cancer. After an hour, many of your cancer preventing P53 DNA-repair

molecules start to unbind from their MDM2 inhibitor, boosting the portion of your metabolism used for repairing DNA double strand breaks and repairing radiation damage. Over-

responding, P53 the the centre of a enzymes giving mechanisms to repair DNA and also cuts down natural cancer and genetic risks, increasing lifespan. It's covered up by secrecy from

biased, ill-informed, complacent anti-nuclear quacks.

When DNA damage is done at by moderate levels of radiation, DNA repair enzyme P53 is activated because the detection of damage leads to the unbinding of P53 from its inhibitor,

MDM2. P53 is then able to accumulate, repairing DNA damage by the use of an array of DNA repair enzymes, and if the repair is unsuccessful, killing the cell (apoptosis) with the

damaged DNA, to prevent cancer. The net result is that in a radiation environment, we adapt and burn up more calories detecting and repairing damaged DNA:

"DNA damage induces phosphorylation (P) of p53 (at the Mdm2 binding site) and Mdm2, preventing Mdm2 from binding to p53. As a

result, the p53 level increases, and stops cells from entering cell cycle until the DNA is repaired. If repair fails, p53 initiates apoptosis



(programmed cell death). Mechanisms resulting in a decrease in p53 steady-state levels are indicated with green arrows and those

resulting in increases p53 levels are indicated with red arrows. Solid lines indicate active mechanisms and broken lines indicate

inactivated mechanisms. Figure taken from [3]. ...

"In the cell, p53 protein binds DNA, which in turn stimulates another gene to produce a protein called p21 that interacts with a cell

division-stimulating protein (cdk2). When p21 is complexed with cdk2, the cell cannot pass through to the next stage of cell division.

The growth arrest stops the progression of cell cycle, preventing replication of damaged DNA. Mutant p53 can not longer bind DNA

in an effective way, and as a consequence the p21 protein is not made available to act as the "stop signal" for cell division. Thus

cells divide uncontrollably, and form tumours [4].

"During growth arrest, p53 may activate the transcription of proteins involved in DNA repair. One of its transcriptional target

genes, p53R2, encodes ribonucleotide reductase, which is important for both DNA replication and repair. p53 also interacts directly

with AP endonuclease and DNA polymerase, which are involved in base excision repair.

"Apoptosis is the "last resort" to avoid proliferation of cells containing abnormal DNA. Apoptosis can be induced by the binding of

Caspase 9 to cytochrome c and Apaf1. p53 may activate the expression of Apaf1 and Bax. The latter can then stimulate the release

of cytochrome c from mitochondria."

- Proctor and Gray (2008), The p53-Mdm2 System, February 2009, model of the month by Vijayalakshmi Chelliah. Original models: BIOMD0000000188 and BIOMD0000000189

Above: How radiation suppresses cancer (by activating P53 as we explained above). Note the gamma dose rates.



Above: How radiation boosts lifespan. Again, note the dose rate needed. As with vitamins, getting far too much radiation has the opposite effect, an overdose. The whole of medicine is

based on the principle of not giving overdoses. The whole of radiation fear mongering, on the other hand, is based on falsely claiming that because overdoses are bad, so too must

optimal doses. By this argument, all medicines should be banned, because they are all dangerous in excessive doses. The media, including so-called scientific journals with anti-nuclear

"peer" reviewers of the politically fanatical, dogmatic variety, pretends not to understand that cancer induction suppressing P53 is activated by moderate dose rates of gamma radiation,

which unbinds P53 from its MDM2 inhibitor. So they suppresse these life saving facts.



Above: a scientific photo set unsuitable for the scare mongering anti-nuclear front page of the New Scientist, Scientific American, BBC "news" website, or Nature Medicine. Not

exactly suitable for the front cover of Helen Caldicott's next bestseller on the effects of the aftermath of nuclear reactor warfare and the neutron bomb, either.

Above: no front page newspaper headlines appeared when Dr Dino Samartzis in 2011 found that bone cancer from radiation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki

required a threshold dose of 85 rads (0.85 Gray or 85 centigray) to the bone marrow (which is shielded by tissue, so that the corresponding threshold radiation meter



free air dose is 1.5 times greater than the bone marrow dose, or about 128 rads). Only 19 cases of bone cancer occurred in 80,181 persons studied. This was peer reviewed

and published after Sanders 2010 book on Radiation Hormesis, so it is not included there. For the more moderate dose rate exposure of radium dial painters, bone

cancers only occurred when the radium intake was at least 100 microcuries (10 Grays delivered over about 20 years), because moderate dose rates have larger

threshold doses for cancer, while low dose rates have an hormesis effect (reducing cancer risks, by increasing the metabolism devoted to DNA repair

enzymes).

Dr Dino Samartzis instead conflated the radium and Hiroshima bone cancer data in his conclusions, by the specious tactic of merely pointing out that the 85

rad bone cancer threshold he found in high dose rate Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors is smaller than the >1000 rad threshold dose needed for the

lower dose rates (20 mR/hour for 20 years) in radium painters. This confusion by him probably helped to give the media an excuse to ignore the truth. Linus Pauling

President Kennedy lied when they claimed that a thousand bone cancers per megaton of nuclear weapons tests due to millions of people getting less than 1 rad each to bones from

strontium 90. In reality, as proved by Finkel in Radiology v67 p665 right back in 1956, the threshold dose for bone cancer from strontium-90 is about a hundred times that for radium

painters, so the threshold dose for bone cancer in high dose rates (Hiroshima, 85 rads bone cancer threshold to bone marrow) and radium (1000 rads threshold), prove nobody got any

bone cancers from nuclear weapons testing. The same massive dose-rate-dependent dose thresholds for bone cancer apply to Fukushima's harmless strontium-90 leaks today!

Exaggerations of radiation ef fects and suppression of benef its are deliberate lies beyond the pale

Note that only 10.7% (848) of the 7,851 solid cancers in 44,635 Hiroshima-Nagasaki survivors were caused by the bomb! Note also that only 46% (94) of the total of 204 leukemias in

49,204 Hiroshima-Nagasaki survivors were caused by the bomb! These are trivial compared to deaths from wind farms, coal, etc (in December 1952, nearly four thousand people

died in London from coal smog. Thus, Britain's nuclear industry, just as nuclear weapons were made to more safely deter war than the equivalent megatonnage of conventional arms,

which would be more expensive, dangerous as proved two world wars with many megadeaths, and would require conscription).

These data are STILL being censored by fear mongering media like Richard Rhodes, The New Yorker, pseudo-scientific journals edited and peer reviewed by ignorant and biased quacks

who make their money from hating reality and creating science fiction. If you think it may be a little rude to treat fanatically biased terror supporting thugs who are obsessed with

exploiting and increasing the suffering of others with malicious scare mongering, try to find a single unbiased quotation about Hiroshima or nuclear testing in Richard Rhodes books. It is

simply unprofessional and nasty behaviour which we are truthfully calling completely disgusting, unethical, unprofessional, dangerous, deluded, fanatical and complacent, because the

data are VITAL for survival in nuclear terrorism:



Above: CENSORED OUT OF THE DOCUMENTARY AND OUT OF JOHN HERSEY NEW YORKER SENSATIONALISM AND TERRORISM MONGERING, AND RICHARD RHODES

PROPAGANDA BOOK: THE SURVIVAL IN MODERN CONCRETE BUILDINGS DESPITE THE FIRESTORM IN HIROSHIMA



Los Alamos report on Trident W76 warhead development history (declassified): LA-14066-H, Tracing the Origins of the W76: 1966-Spring 1973



(U) by Betty L. Perkins. Note the "Confetti argument" section where legendary Los Alamos National Laboratory Director Harold Agnew (the man

who personally filmed the Hiroshima explosion using a cine camera in a B29, see photos below) points out that the effects of Hiroshima on

substantial buildings was NOT impressive. (Also on Scribd; also item 548 in the DOE declassified PDF documents list, all FOIA requests).

Compare that to the American Office of Technology Assessment's widely hyped lies on the Effects of Nuclear War, 1979. For a refutation of

Rotblat-CND Hiroshima and fallout radiation effects deceptions by the hard truth, please see Radiation scare mongering debunked.

Harold Agnew LANL Director and Hiroshima film cameraman, debunked Hiroshima exaggerations with "confetti argument".

In regards to the popular exploitation of Hiroshima suffering by those who wish to profit from sensational "journalism", Penney proved that buildings

absorb substantial amounts of energy in the act of being damaged or shaken, thus weakening the blast in a city relative to that over unobstructed

ground, like a desert or ocean in a nuclear test, so the city damage attenuates the destructive pressure and reduces the range of blast, particularly for

the larger distances affected for higher yield bursts. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were air burst to maximise the range of damage to wooden buildings,

which averted fallout and left concrete buildings standing (if you ground burst the bomb you greatly reduce the blast ranges for wooden house

destruction, and the cratering action throws up a cone of dirt within milliseconds, shielding and cooling the fireball, thus reducing the radiating

temperature and the thermal yield and also increasing the shielding effect due to the city skyline):



Hiroshima ground zero, after 6 August 1945, quite a different story from American propaganda. Modern city type concrete buildings and the people in them

survived near ground zero, which is in the foreground of this photo (photo source here or here). The media's secrecy over real radiation health effects is

tragic in the cost to humanity, even before the cost in conventional war casualties is included.



Hiroshima's brick and concrete buildings airbrushed out of history, to create the myth of total devastation for propaganda. How many concrete and

wooden buildings do modern cities contain today? Unlike Hiroshima which was mainly wooden housing, today's cities are mainly brick and concrete,

not wooden.



Surface burst blast effects on modern city buildings: surface bursts also result in immense thermal radiation shadowing which prevents fires and burns in modern cities (apart from a

few upper windows on buildings facing the fireball near ground zero) even in megaton yield bursts, and very substantial initial radiation shielding and fallout radiation shielding, all of

which are usually ignored totally by popular hype ("Nukemap" or Carey Sublette FAS-cist style anti-civil defense, anti-deterrence, brainwashing propaganda) of Glasstone and Dolan's

Effects of Nuclear Weapons data, applied from unobstructed deserts to cities with no correction for shielding by buildings. Such deceivers win acclaim, like Richard Rhodes who denied

civil defense in Hiroshima in his popular deceptive books on atomic and hydrogen bombs.

Note that, in the table above, for a 0.5 kiloton ordinary nuclear blast you can avoid any severe damage at 150 metres distance, hence the 1 kiloton neutron bomb (with enhanced neutron and

suppressed blast and heat) air burst at 500 metres altitude will avert the kind of devastation you get in conventional warfare and even civil wars in Syria, Ukraine, etc. As in the 1980s when

Reagan deployed the W79 neutron warhead in Europe, the threat of a neutron bomb then has a deterrent effect on people planning invasions: they tend to want to negotiate and end

their Cold War, instead of losing a war.

American sanctions against the anti-West nuclear Iran are lifted in July 2015 (just like American sanctions against North Korea were lifted in deal in 1994

which promised international inspections of nuclear plants, but instead led to North Korea's nuclear weapon tests and ICBM development), releasing to

Iran 100 billion in frozen assets and 20 billion annually from oil exports. Iran has a track record of hiding the construction of two uranium enrichment

plants, before spies found them. The American-Iranian deal means that Russia will be able to sit on the International Atomic Energy Authority inspection

panel to hold up justice as usual by groupthink veto; Russia has a vested interest in preparing Iran for war with Israel (and therefore America) by

supplying Russian S-300 surface to air missiles to Iran. (Back in April 2015, Putin lifted his ban on delivery of S-300 missiles to Iran.) In

2005, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Israel must be "wiped off the face of the earth", and allies of Israel "will burn in the fires of the

Islamic nation's fury." Israel fears that the lifting of the sanctions against Iran will lead to an arms race and nuclear war, while America is lifting the

sanctions in an effort to outdo Russia in being friendly to Iran, to win friendship with cash (always a disaster, as proved in the Cold War, where rival



sides' attempts to win over megalomaniac dictators just increased their egotism and craziness). Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called

the deal a "bad mistake of historic proportions". He explained: "Iran will get a cash bonanza of billions of dollars, which will enable it to pursue its

aggression."

We do not have a truly free media when fashion prevents the facts from being openly and freely discussed to ascertain the truth on nuclear weapons deterrent

capabilities for ending warfare. The perils from pseudoscience surviving in popular culture on the basis of "gut feeling" censorship of truth was revealed when the

consequences of eugenics pseudoscience were exposed in 1945. Science is not a particular method (methods change as a result of science, as Feyerabend

explained), but an objective attitude, an interest in understanding and expanding upon the data from every objective angle, and of critically testing ideas

and theories, and contrasting them to alternative models. Censorship due to bias is anti-science, and leads to disaster, as in anti diversity eugenics. Resources

end up focussed on dealing with false scare-mongering paranoia, just as eugenics ended up being used by racists and holocaust deniers. If everyone was objective, the

money-making eugenicists and racist holocaust deniers could be ignored, and the real problems could be solved.

Why do CND people dogmatically reject truth, and go espousing the old weapons effects exaggerations that in the 1930s proved invaluable

to enemies for coercion, appeasement, and megadeaths by costly "conventional" warfare?



The era of secrecy on nuclear weapon capabilities since 1945 has been one in which millions of people have died in conventional wars, due to "pacifists" efforts to ban credible nuclear deterrence as a means of ending conventional wars.

Here is a positive suggestion. If the survivors of Hiroshima and the so-called "politically correct" of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and the media really want to do something towards eliminating the megadeaths caused by conventional war and the squandering of

money on hate based propaganda campaigns against the only proved deterrents we have, perhaps one day they could accept the truth and consider the possibility to back cheap, fact-proved, effective civil defense to eliminate most of the collateral damage and casualties,

allowing relatively clean (low fission yield) tactical nuclear weapons to credibly deter conventional wars (the costly Trident-type strategic second strike capability can be retained to deter escalation, just as our mustard gas and gas masks in WWII deterred 12,000 tons of

tabun nerve gas being sent over in bombers, V1 cruise missiles and V2 rockets).

Why didn't nuclear weaponeers like Harold Agnew in public advocate the truth about nuclear weapons, too? Instead of silly "shoot the messenger" hate campaigns and tantrums, the facts should be rationally considered, if indeed concerns for nuclear weapons are real (rather

than just a proxy for political untruths). Part of the reason is explained in a 1950 report on nuclear weapons in Korea, which completely missed the point that the fear factor for enemy insurgents in the open or in tanks with poor neutron shielding will deter the enemy

politicians from aggression, by easily stopping aggression. The 1950 report (linked here) instead tries to use enemy propaganda as an excuse to forego nuclear deterrence of conventional war, and also claims that the (un) United Nations (a propaganda term, not a reality)

would become disjointed by vetoes or hostility if conventional war was ended by nuclear deterrence. Sure it would. The enemies of peace would complain. Hitler complained to Prime Minister Chamberlain about David Low's cartoons of him in British newspapers, a complaint

that led to secret pressure on Low's editors to try to stop publication of cartoons critical of Hitler. This is what you must expect!



Professor Baker proof tested these cheap, effective indoor and outdoor WWII British shelters are ideal for use against conventional and nuclear war,

hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes. Where houses were completely demolished, 97.5% survived in shelters. This fact has enormous utility for civil

wars in Ukraine and Syria, if adequate warning sirens systems can be put in place.

Even if adequate warning systems and air raid sirens are not available or are unreliable, as for the V1 and particularly the V2 rocket attacks in WWII,

then there is another system, again proof tested in war, which consists of indoor wooden scaffolding in offices, bedrooms, etc., to protect people against

building collapse, as shown in the fully proof tested June 1941 official British handbook, Shelter at Home, which was the idea behind the 1980s Protect

and Survive and Domestic nuclear shelters, technical guidance manuals. Edward Leader Williams who helped Lord Baker proof test indoor shelters in

WWII, proposed indoor table type blast and fallout sheltering against the H bomb in 1955, in response to the Strath report.



The popular CND-hyped myth that the city was vaporized in a nanosecond or so just doesn't survive a reality check: in the Bank of Japan near ground

zero, survivors remained right through the surrounding firestorm, extinguishing the few firebrands that were blow in, using water buckets.



Firestorms in modern cities debunked 1964

If the Hiroshima population had been in their air raid shelters, over 99% could have survived the 16 kt explosion (survival data

for Hiroshima and Nagasaki from Dirkwood researchers and others linked here justify a protection factor of at least 25 or more

for shelters, reducing mortality in Hiroshima from 25% to 1% or less; additionally, Glasstone and Dolan 1977 point out that the

median lethal range in concrete buildings was 0.12 mile compared to 1.3 miles outdoors, which is a difference in median lethal

areas and in casualties by over a factor of 100). This fact is little changed when the yield increases, contrary to the usual direct

scaling propaganda, since a modern MIRV warhead of say 160 kt yield actually blasts a median lethal area that is bigger by only

about the 2/3-power of yield, hence giving a casualty amplification factor of 10^(2/3) = 4.64, which implies a survival fraction of

0.99^(4.64) = 0.95 or 95% survival. But the popular science fiction based quack media anti nuclear propaganda completely

ignores all these facts. As it was, despite not being in their shelters, 75% of the population of Hiroshima survived, making a fast

recovery.

What about solid cancer tumors? During the period from 1958-98, in 44,635 survivors, 7,851 malignancies (first primary) were observed, of which 848 were due to radiation

(10.7% due to radiation). Almost 90% of these cancers were not due to radiation, but were natural cancers (RERF). What about the blood cancers, leukemia? From 1950-2000 in 49,204

survivors there were 94 leukemia deaths due to bomb radiation (RERF data).

REVIEW OF HIROSHIMA: THE AFTERMATH

Freedom of factual criticism in objective science versus subjective opinion or fashionable dogma, the findings of John Stuart Mill's On Liberty

There is the greatest difference between presuming an opinion to be true, because, with every opportunity for contesting it, it has not been refuted, and assuming its

truth for the purpose of not permitting its refutation.



John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

Not the violent conflict between parts of the truth, but the quiet suppression of half of it, is the formidable evil: there is always hope when people are forced to listen to

both sides; it is when they attend only to one that errors harden into prejudices, and truth itself ceases to have the effect of truth, by being exaggerated into falsehood.


In general, opinions contrary to those commonly received can only obtain a hearing by studied moderation of language, and the most cautious avoidance of

unnecessary offence, from which they hardly ever deviate even in a slight degree without losing ground: while unmeasured vituperation employed on the side of the

prevailing opinion, really does deter people from professing contrary opinions, and from listening to those who profess them.


First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility. Secondly,

though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of the truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is

rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.


To call any proposition certain, while there is any one who would deny its certainty if permitted, but who is not permitted, is to assume that we ourselves, and those

who agree with us, are the judges of certainty, and judges without hearing the other side.


In the case of any person whose judgment is really deserving of confidence, how has it become so? Because he has kept his mind open to criticism of his opinions and

conduct. Because it has been his practice to listen to all that could be said against him; to profit by as much of it as was just the only way in which a human being

can make some approach to knowing the whole of a subject, is by hearing what can be said about it by persons of every variety of opinion, and studying all modes in

which it can be looked at by every character of mind. No wise man ever acquired his wisdom in any mode but this; nor is it in the nature of human intellect to become

wise in any other manner.




Above: for the trivial fallout and residual radiation patterns measured at Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the soil activity versus depth, see the original December 1945 classified report by the US Naval Technical Mission to Japan, linked here or here . The

originally classif ied Capabilities of Nuclear Weapons has a detailed prediction method for the neutron induced activity and the ef fect of burst altitude on fallout (omitted from the unclassif ied Glasstone and Dolan propaganda scare mongering bible,

Effects of Nuclear Weapons). (Click here for some other editions of the secret Capabilities of Nuclear W eapons, which should have been published widely decades ago to reassure people about radiation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.)

The joint Japanese-American Hiroshima and Nagasaki Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) confirmed the following cancers of the blood (leukemia) and

tissue (solid tumors) from Hiroshima and Nagasaki in well over 40,000 survivors over a period of about five decades (note that the excess leukemia rate peaked in

1952 and fell rapidly thereafter and is no longer showing up). The "excess" is derived from comparing the measured rates of cancer in irradiated survivors to a

carefully matched group of people of the same age, smoking habits, etc., to establish the natural cancer rates with the same diagnosis systems to avoid bias (this was

not done after Chernobyl, when 100% of cancers and birth defects were claimed to be radiation effects by anti-nuclear propaganda money making, terror exploiting

big business corporations).

Note that only 10.7% (848) of the 7,851 solid cancers in 44,635 survivors were caused bythe bomb! Note also that only 46% (94) of the total of 204 leukemias in 49,204 survivorswere caused by the bomb! (These data are from the RERF official peer reviewed,published data tables below.) Result: about 90% of cancers in Hiroshima and Nagasakiwere natural. Why isn't that fact newspaper and TV news headline, after all the scaremongering propaganda about radiation:



Conversion of metric units is: 1 Gy (Gray) = 100 rads = 1 Joule/kilogram of energy absorbed. However, note that the doses in RERF tables are not air doses

(measured on civil defense radiac meters) but internal doses, e.g. bone marrow doses which are shielded by the surrounding tissue and thus are lower than the air dose

by about the factor 1.5. In other words, you have to multiply RERF doses by about 1.5 to get air doses that are measured on normally calibrated radiation meters.

As usual for media anti-nuclear propaganda "education", the TV program totally ignores the published DS02 research program which established the radiation

dosimetry for different kinds of buildings and exposure sources (prompt and delayed), and thus fails to discriminate between the immediate nuclear radiation received

within 20 seconds (neutrons and gamma rays from the fireball before it ascended to 60,000 feet) and the subsequent rainout of firestorm soot by condensed moisture.

The fires took 20 minutes to begin to merge, and 2-3 hours to reach peak firestorm intensity, which:

(1) allowed many survivors to escape the firestorm area in good time, having survived in concrete buildings,

(2) the soot rainout process proved by Hiroshima debunks the "stable soot cloud" theory behind "nuclear winter", even if modern tall city concrete buildings

didn't block out the heat flash by George R. Stanbury's shadowing effect, and

(3) allowed the radioactive cloud to be blown many miles downwind before the black rain was even formed over Hiroshima. Therefore, the radioactive cloud was

blown away before the firestorm created soot rainout.

The two never mixed to any appreciable extent, because the action of the wind in blowing fallout away before the firestorm begam. So the local radioactive fallout in

Hiroshima when actually measured (as recorded in the book Hiroshima by John Hersey in 1946, and other studies) was trivial and contributed an insignificant

percentage of the total radiation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Essentially all of the dose came within 20 seconds from initial radiation, not fallout. It is shameful that

this myth, started by Stalin's alleged communist spy and propagandarist Willfred aka Peter Burchett in 1945, continues, aided by well known

propaganda organizations like CND and the Kremlin, that obfuscate the truth and deliberately distort the facts. As for the inhabitants of Rongelap after

their exposure on 1 March 1954, the lingering radiation years afterwards is soon dwarfed by natural background radiation, and so contributes an insignificant

percentage of the total dose, most of which comes soon after a nuclear explosion (owing to the rapid decay rate).

Nevertheless, the program does document the rapid recovery of trams, railway, electricity, and the rapid rebuilding of Hiroshima.



Height of burst curves developed by Los Alamos mathematician John von Neumann and physicist Fredrick Reines during World War II and secretly

published in the classified 1947 report LA-1021, Blast Wave. So secret was this data that when the report was supposedly "declassified", Los Alamos

issued a report of re-typeset extracts (LA-2000, March 1958) edited by anti-civil defense fanatic Hans Bethe which deliberately omitted the key height

of burst graph and also omitted the explanation that reflected pressures are false for non-rigid buildings. In other words, you only get the predicted

"reflected" pressures on walls if they do not absorb energy and are not damaged or moved by the blast.



Dr Sanders has actually tested plutonium for safety, proving evidence of a threshold dose for lung cancer, and also proving evidence that gamma radiation reduces the harm from alpha

radiation by hormesis. As the references above prove, this is peer reviewed research, included in top journals and in his 2010 book published by Springer. It is the effect of DNA repair

by protein P53 which is kicked into action by radiation, which unbinds it from its MDM2 inhibitor. DNA repair enzymes, controlled by P53, prevent the proliferation of cancer below the

threshold dose rate. Only higher dose rates than the threshold, which overwhelm P53 repair systems, result in an increase in natural cancer rates. This is still censored out, because a

pseudoscientific "no threshold" dogma was established by anti-nuclear geneticists before P53 had even been discovered.

Plutonium-239 is even less harmful per gram than the Americium-241 in your household smoke detector, which emits higher energy alpha particles and also has a specific activity

(decays per second per gram) which is more than fifty times lower than Americium-241.

Plutonium-239 emits 5.25 MeV energy alpha particles. Your smoke detector's Americium-241 emits more damaging 5.49 MeV alpha particles!

The specific radioactivity of Americium-241 is 3.2 curies/gram, whereas plutonium-239 is only 0.062 curies/gram.

Note that the formula for specific activity is false as given by anti-civil defense crackpot Joseph Rotblat in his shoddy, biased, inaccurate and ill informed mouthpiece book, Nuclear

Radiation in Warfare. The truth is, the specific activity per gram is equal to number of radioactive atoms in a gram, divided by the effective mean life, which is bigger than the half life by a

factor of 1/(natural logarithm of 2).

So plutonium-239 certainly is a lot less dangerous than the familiar household element that we rely on for safety in efficient, reliable smoke detectors, just as we rely on plutonium to



deter world wars. (As someone rude might add: "Stick that fact in your pipe and smoke it, antinuclear dictators of the deluded media." The deeper question, however, is why the so-

called "nuclear industry" doesn't explain any true facts credibly, failing to reply to arrogant, patronising, authoritative-sounding, drivel and deceit. It is running scared, just like the

American nuclear deterrence people, who are deterred by first the "threat" of enemy propaganda and secondly the "threat" of an end to pseudo-"United Nations" unity, something that

only exists in pipe dreams.)

Natural thermal instability of DNA at 37 C body temperature causes the vast majority of the DNA damage: 2 mSv/year radiation is trivial!

Compared to notorious killers like driving, smoking or drinking, nuclear risks though objectively carrying little danger in their modern deployments

stir the deepest fears ... we are being bombarded with cosmic radiation ... 6.2 millisieverts (mSv) of radiation a year ... Familiar risks like car

accidents, though far more likely to kill people, are still better accepted. ... About 35 years ago ... the nuclear industry approached Fischhoff, who is

now a professor of decision science at Carnegie Mellon University ... He found an industry that struggled to explain, without condescension or untoward

complexity ... "The nuclear industry had done a terrible job communicating the facts ..." Fischhoff said ... "It continues to do a horrible job of communicating." ... call-

backs to Hiroshima and Nagasaki are frequent, for good reason and they seriously stigmatize the industry, in the psychological sense of the word, said David

Ropeik, a former television reporter ... "We have a particularly good memory for the scary stuff," Ropeik added. ... During his work as a television reporter, he

reported on nuclear power plants like they were a "second Satan" for two decades, he said. ... "We have very little ... that will make it clear to people what's going on

in a credible way," Fischhoff said.

Paul Voosen, Humans Wired for Terror Over Remote Radiation Threats, New York Times, 18 March 2011.

What Fischhoff should do, is start the rebuilding with the foundation, Hiroshima.



Im assuming everyone knows that [Richard] Broinowski is Helen Caldicotts brother and so hes just another mouthpiece for her misinformation ...

Caldicott is not a radiation scientist who has spent countless hours studying the effects of radiation on people. Shes ... someone who has made a name

for herself by making outrageous, unsubstantiated claims about nuclear power. ... shes held up as some fount of all nuclear wisdom we need to tell

people the truth about her. (Terry Krieg, 22 February 2012.) [This is unhelpful, because it lacks specific examples of their agenda, so it backfires.]

We have to be sure our facts about nuclear power are right, as the latest exchange with Helen Caldicott shows.

By George Monbiot. Published on the Guardians website, 13th April 2011

"My request to Helen Caldicott was a simple one: I asked her to give me sources for the claims she had made about the effects of radiation. Helen had

made a number of startling statements during a television debate, and I wanted to know whether or not they were correct. ...

"At first I asked for general sources for her claims. She sent me nine documents: press releases, newspapers articles and an advertisement. Only one of them was

linked to a scientific publication, the BEIR VII report published by the National Academy of Sciences. She urged me to read it. I did so and discovered that, far from

supporting her claims, it starkly contradicts them. For example, it says:

- The risk of radiation-induced mutations ... is sufficiently small that it has not been detected in humans, even in thoroughly studied

irradiated populations such as those of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

- Regarding transmissible genetic damage from the exposure of future parents, such as spontaneous abortions, congenital malformations,

neonatal mortality, stillbirths, and the sex ratio of offspring ... there is no consistent evidence of an association of any such outcomes with

exposure to environmental sources of radiation.

- On balance, the existing evidence does not support the conclusion that rates of childhood leukemia have increased as a result of

radiation exposures from the Chernobyl accident.



"I began to wonder whether Helen has actually read this report, or was hoping that, at 423 pages, it would scare me away. ... She claimed that isotopes of krypton,

xenon and argon can mutate the genes in the eggs and sperm and cause genetic disease. When I asked her for a source, she told me, This is also described in my

book. In fact her book says (page 55): There have never been any epidemiological studies performed on the effects of exposure to the noble gases xenon and

krypton. This flatly contradicts her own claim. When I pressed her for better sources, her publishers wrote to me and said she did not have time to find them. Now

she has had time time enough to write an article for the Guardian attacking me but still hasnt supported the claims I questioned.

"Then she appears to suggest that iodine-131 can continuously irradiate small volumes of cells ... over many years. As it has a half life of 8 days, this seems unlikely.

... Then she makes a remarkable allegation. As a result of a conspiracy hatched with the International Atomic Energy Agency, since 1959 the World Health

Organisation has made no more statements on health and radioactivity. This is completely false ... the WHO currently runs an Ionizing Radiation Programme and

a Radiation and Environmental Health Programme .... It has set up an International Research Advisory Committee to identify gaps and under-discovered areas

on health effects from low-dose exposures to ionizing radiation. In 2006 it published a 167-page report titled Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident. As for

the alleged conspiracy, this is a story that has been circulating among anti-nuclear campaigners for many years, becoming ever more lurid. ... This is what happens

when we fail to be as sceptical about the ideas we like as we are about the ideas we dont. Incidentally, Helen has still not provided a shred of evidence for her claim

that the recent report by another UN agency the UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation into the Chernobyl disaster is a total cover-up.

Twice I have asked her to substantiate this allegation; twice she has replied with accusations about the WHO. Is she aware that these are different agencies?

"But perhaps most alarming is her continued reliance on the report by Alexey Yablokov, Vassily Nesterenko and Alexey Nesterenko, which claims

that 980,000 people died as a result of Chernobyl. As its critics have pointed out, this figure cannot possibly be correct, as it arises from the

extraordinary assumption that all increased deaths since 1986 from a host of diseases including many which have no known connection with radiation

were caused by Chernobyl. The report has not been peer-reviewed and the academy which published it has distanced itself from it.

"Continuing to use such a severely flawed document for your central claims about the health impacts of radiation hardly inspires confidence. ... I think

these points are worth making, for several reasons. I believe that journalists should not stand by while misinformation is spread. If there is any value in journalism, it lies

in trying to winnow fact from fiction, and helping people to form a more accurate view of the world. If, on the basis of falsehoods and exaggerations, we make the

wrong decisions, the consequences can be momentous. ...

"What if, for example, the continuing dangers of radioactive pollution for the people in the nations around Chernobyl have been so greatly exaggerated

that they have been exposed to 25 years of unnecessary terror and distress? What if this has caused serious and widespread psychological problems,

as the UN Scientific Committee suggests(Page 513)? What if we have exploited vulnerable people those born with deformities and genetic diseases

by parading their conditions as examples of the damage radiation has done, when the evidence suggests that they are not? What if the same burdens

are inflicted on the people of Japan?

"If that has happened, is it not a terrible thing to bear? Dont we have a duty to interrogate ourselves as scrupulously as we can to ensure that we have not and will not

do such a thing? ... If we spread misinformation, we could inadvertently achieve the opposite."

Journalists did that long ago, starting with misinformation published widely after Hiroshima, 1945.



Ryoji Hasegawa of Japanese Secret Intelligence Headquarters, Tokyo, monitored the B29 Enola Gay's call sign, correlating it with otherinformation (the weather planes that flew over the target before hand, etc.) and worked out it was on a special mission to drop a new weapon,

probably an atom bomb, on Hiroshima. PICTURE CREDIT: He is interviewed in the 6 July 2015 Channel 5 program, Hiroshima: the Aftermath.



Yoshie Oka then detected the approached B29s with the atomic bomb in her station in the military headquarters bunker, just north of Hiroshima Castle. However, she needed to report her findings to senior officers for them to authorize another blast of the Hiroshima air raid sirens to get the people into theirnumerous air raid shelters again (as the U.S. Strategic Bombing survey documented, there were false alarms hours earlier when the weather survey planeahead of Enola Gay flew over the city). This time, Yoshie Oka was left waiting. All senior officers were having breakfast. Finally, at 8:13am - just 2 minutesbefore the explosion - she got the authorization to sound the sirens. She did not manage to do this before the explosion. This explains the disaster at

Hiroshima for the first time. The shelters survived and shielded the blast, heat and radiation. People were not in them due to the failure ofthe administration of the civil defense warning system. The harm done to civil defense by a handful of anti-truth, anti-fact, anti-deterrence,

deceitful, fear-mongering, war-continuing "journalists" who abuse their position of trust and authority, is the real crime against understandingtruth in the story of Hiroshima.



Color view of the Hiroshima ground zero area after the 6 August 1945 nuclear attack. Many of these brick and concrete buildings survived theexplosion, were evacuated by survivors before the firestorm (fires in wooden houses merged after 20 minutes and reached peak intensity 2-3hours afterwards), and were later burned out by firebrands landing through broken windows, if there was nobody inside to extinguish them.



Hiroshima cloud seen from ground level: the stem and fireball are separated due to the height of burst. By the time fireball soot rainout started, 2 hours later,the mushroom with most of the radioactivity, had been blown many miles downwind from Hiroshima, explaining why there was no significant fallout (click

here for Hiroshima fallout map; note that the doses were proved to be insignificant compared to natural background radiation over the periodfor long term effects):



Hiroshima fireball and cloud stem are separate when first filmed from a B29 observation aircraft. By the time the stem entered the fireball, it had cooled belowthe condensation temperature of most fission products, so little contaminated dust was produced. Significant fallout requires surface bursts or thunderstorms.

Modern city buildings made of concrete did not blast or burn down, unlike the predominant wooden buildings in Hiroshima. Recovery was very rapid.



Modern buildings survive proximity to a nuclear explosion, central Hiroshima, 1945. The multistory building in the centre is the famous HiroshimaChugoku Shimbun newspaper office.

Robert Jungk carefully investigated the history of the recovery in Hiroshima by interviewing the people involved and collecting first handreports, and gives further interesting details in his book Children of the Ashes (Heinemann, London, 1961):

1. On 31 August 1945: 'the first locally produced and locally printed post-war edition of the Chugoku Shimbun was on sale in the streets ofHiroshima ... 'Our darkroom was an air-raid shelter dug into the hillside [which survived of course]', one of the editors remembers, 'but ourtype had to be cast in the open air, under the sunny sky.'

2. On 7 September 1945, the Chugoku Shimbun reported that Hiroshima then had a population estimated to be 130,000.

3. On 10 September 1945, electricity was reconnected to some parts of Hiroshima: 'huts made of planks quickly knocked together ... alreadyhad electric light.'

4. On 5 November 1945, the Chugoku Shimbun reported that - despite inertia and delays due to 'the rigidity of bureaucratic procedure' whichwas hindering the recovery rate - a lot of progress was being made:

'Housing. The building of houses is to be systematically begun on 15 November. ...'Tramways. At present, ten trams are in commission on themain route, eight on the Miyajima route and five muncipal buses. These twenty-three vehicles must cater for an average of 42,000 personsdaily.

'Some 70% of the destroyed buildings of Hiroshima had been reconstructed by mid-1949." (Source: Research Department, Hiroshima MunicipalOffice, as cited in Hiroshima, Hiroshima Publishing, 1949. Other recovery data are given in U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, The Effects ofAtomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Washington, D.C., 1946, p. 8.)

Journalism on nuclear war has changed since the 1945 Chugoku Shimbun. The consensus now allows editing all of the facts out of a newspaper,leaving superstitions, anecdotal fear mongering:



Trains resume almost immediately in Hiroshima.



Cleaning up debris in Hiroshima, prior to rebuilding work.

Modern bridges and modern steel/concrete buildings survived even close to ground zero. The aiming point for the bomb a T-shaped bridge in the centre ofthe city. It survived.



Trade is soon restored in Hiroshima.

75% of the population of Hiroshima survived, most making a full recovery. What about solid cancer tumors? During the period from 1958-98, in 44,635 survivors,

7,851 malignancies (first primary) were observed, of which 848 were due to radiation (10.7% due to radiation). Almost 90% of these cancers were not due to radiation, but were

natural cancers (RERF). What about the blood cancers, leukemia? From 1950-2000 in 49,204 survivors there were 94 leukemia deaths due to bomb radiation (RERF data).



Thermal flash scarring only on side facing bomb. Any duck and cover prevents this. Yoshie Oka's superiors preventedthe air raid warning being sounded because they were all having breakfast together, with no one senior on duty.



Nuclear weapons effects secrecy allowed Stalin's - aka Wilfred Burchett's - myths to circulate: for the air bursts on Japan the radiation dose wasreceived in 20 seconds, causing a minimum in white blood cell count 30 days later. Fallout was trivial in comparison. This has been confirmed by

radiation measurements in the cities. The false correlation between delayed effects and lingering radiation is still loved and claimed to be"uncontroversial journalism" by certain deluded media.

The basic problem for the newspapers is conflicting interests. See the example below from the inaugural issue (issue number 1, 24 April 1900)of the same newspaper, the Daily Express. Note the contradiction. This newspaper's innovation was printing news on the front page (othernewspapers of the period printed out adverts on the front page, to make the reader buy the paper to see news). But the point is, theinaugural issue contains a big front page sensational story about the German Kaiser's pro-peace claims (he actually sparked world war one 14 yearslater by invading Belgium, forcing Britain to declare war on Germany for the Treaty of London, 1839), yet on page 4 the editor, C. Arthur Pearson,states he: "will not provide a parade ground for marshalling the fads of any individual. It will advertise all men, but no man in particular -outside its advertisement columns." But it had already advertised the German Kaiser's peace propaganda for free on page 1! Then, it continuesabout the Kaiser:

"Somehow, is has become a newspaper tradition to love the darkness better than the light, to put the bad news in bigger letters



than the good news, to make capital out of the sudden ending of life, the catastrophe ... all the bitterness and sorrow ... As we start,we were cheered by a message from the German Emperor ... Peace is the hope of all sensible rulers ... the earnest desire of theKaiser. ... What conscientious monarch could want war, with its dreary records of lives sacrificed, of treasure squandered, ofindustry interrupted, and national progress stopped? Not one. We have passed the period of conquest by War Lords for the sakeof conquest ... We are in the midst of war, but none the less we recognise that this is the age of peace, of quiet conquest by commercial arts. The trader rules the world; we have almost outgrown the soldier. No man is more in sympathy with the times than the German Emperor -equipped as he is with a hundred uniforms, skilled to marshal armies ... not ignorant of the control of warships ... His first hope is the preservationof international peace ..."



The crew of the B29 Enola Gay, piloted by Paul W. Tibbets, speeded up the end of the war. Like the Vietnam wardecades later, heavy conventional (explosive and incendiary/napalm) bombing actually hardened the will to fight in some

quarters.

Rebuilding work in Hiroshima. A majority of homes were rebuilt within 4 years.



Makeshift homes in Hiroshima, employing surviving debris outside the firestorm.

Hiroshima recovered fast from nuclear attack, beginning within days of the explosion with trams, trains, and electricityrestored in some areas, even before any help from outside arrived:



Hiroshima power lines were repaired, soon after nuclear explosion.

Trams operation was restored in Hiroshima within days of nuclear attack.



ABOVE: Yoshie Oka in Hiroshima identified the B29 bombers and passed on a report to her seniors in time to get thepeople of Hiroshima into their air raid shelters, most of which proved to survive intact against a 16 kt nuclear air burst at

600 metres, but the officers were taking breakfast, and she only received the order to start the complex sequenceneeded to sound the public air raid sirens at 8:13 am, two minutes before the explosion. She was still trying to get the

air raid alarm out when the bomb went off with a flash.

Even without air raid shelters (which survived close to ground zero in Hiroshima), many modern buildings near ground zero, made of brick or concrete, did offerprotection from blast winds, heat flash, and radiation shielding. This is a fact applicable to civil defense considerations today, even without special shelters.



The documentary Hiroshima: the Aftermath unlike previous Cold War propaganda on the subject, at least makes some admission of the rapid recovery fromnuclear warfare!

John Hersey's 1946 book Hiroshima summarizes the rapid recovery thus:

"In Hiroshima, all utilities and transportation services were disrupted for varying lengths of time. In general however services were restored about as rapidly asthey could be used by the depleted population. Through railroad service was in order in Hiroshima on 8 August, and electric power was available in most of thesurviving parts on 7 August, the day after the bombing. ... Rolling transportation suffered extensive damage. The damage to railroad tracks, and roads wascomparatively small, however. The electric power transmission and distribution systems were badly wrecked. The telephone system was approximately 80%damaged, and no service was restored until 15 August."

This is confirmed by other studies of the rapid recovery of Hiroshima, before significant help arrived.



Above: the actual Nevada nuclear test EMP effects data in the 1964 Capabilities of nuclear weapons page 13-2 is a summary of E.G. & G.s 1961 secret report by B. J.Stralser, Electromagnetic Effects from Nuclear Tests, which describes the EMP effects on tripping circuit breakers over 30 miles away from kiloton yield Nevada tower

bursts. Additional EMP data was obtained in the 1962 Nevada surface burst Small Boy, a deliberate EMP effects test.

1964 Capabilities of Nuclear Weapons, the one which compares American nuclear fallout predictions to the 1956 British Buffalo Round 2 groundburst nuclear test at Maralinga, Australia, has been kindly emailed to me as a PDF by

Fina Martinez-Myers702-794-5112

Nuclear Testing Archive

National Security Technologies, LLC

Contractor to the U.S. Department of Energy

Title: TM 23-200/OP NAV INSTRUCTION 03400/C/ AFM 136-1/FMFM 11-2 "CAPABILITIES OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS (U) ( 1964 )Author(s): Subject Terms: NUCLEAR WEAPONSDocument Location: Location - NNSA/NSO Nuclear Testing Archive Address - P.O. Box 98521 City - Las Vegas State - NV Zip - 89193-8521 Phone -(702)794-5106 Fax - (702)794-5107 Email - [email protected] Type: REPORTPublication Date: 1964 Dec 31Declassification Status: DeclassifiedDocument Pages: 0214Accession Number: NV0105483OpenNet Entry Date: 2006 Jul 01



Fig 4-4 in 1964 Capabilities of Nuclear Weapons compares the actual fallout pattern from the 1956 Buffalo-2 surface burst in Australia with the idealized model based on Nevada tests. For a different plot of this Buffalo-1 fallout pattern

see http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA956123:



The Buffalo-2 test was used to determine the partition of radioactivity between stem and cloud, based on the measured wind shear, which acted to separatethe two components of the fallout pattern (the stem went only northwards, whereas the cloud top went due eastwards before the particles settled out, see thehodograph of wind pattern above). This is very useful for civil defense, because it comparison of the wind pattern to the fallout map makes it clear preciselywhy the fallout has spread out like a fan, and you can then develop simple methods to extrapolate from this solid example to make allowances for wind shear infallout prediction. In addition, Buffalo-2 was instrumented to measure EMP, which is also unclassified now:

The first attempt at a theory of [surface burst] radioflash was by [T.S.] Popham, in 1954, who suggested that radio signals were due to currentscarried by Compton electrons arising from gamma rays produced in the nuclear explosion Both the period and amplitude of the radio signalwould be expected to increase very slightly with yield.

J. B. Taylor, A Theory of Radioflash, U.K. Atomic Weapons Research Establishment, Aldermaston, report AWRE-O33/59, October 1959,originally classified "Confidential", pp. 3-18.

Fig 1b in Taylor's report AWRE-O33/59 plots the radiated EMP electric field as measured from a kiloton surface burst (presumably the Buffalo-2 shot in 1956at the Marcoo site in Maralinga): the peak field measured at a distance of 300 km is 28.1 v/m in the NEGATIVE direction at a time of 5 microseconds. Zero fieldis at 17.2 microseconds. Peak positive is at 23 microseconds with 15.4 v/m and second zero is at 42.5 microseconds. Second negative is at 54 microsecondswith about 3.75 v/m.



Buffalo Round 2 was a 1.4 kiloton fission bomb (an AWRE declassified photo of bomb being set up for the test is shown above) surface burst on Maralinga

soil, which is calcium carbonate topped with a thin layer of silicate sand. This Maralinga soil produced silicate sand (Nevada test like) fallout for tower bursts like

Buffalo Round 1 which produced no significant crater, proving that for low altitude bursts the fallout is caused by the sweep-up of loose desert sand by the afterwinds

and updraft under the rising fireball. But for the surface burst Buffalo Round 2, the fallout particles were composed of calcium oxide surrounded by calcium carbonate

which must have come from the calcium calcium subsoil, like the American tests on coral islands in Bikini and Eniwetok Atoll. This proved that the cratering ejecta

provides the fallout material in a surface burst. The 1964 Capabilities of Nuclear Weapons, TM 23-200, uses this British surface burst to check its fallout model

(the illustration was deleted from the 1972 edition and does not appear in the 1957 edition).

In other news, a new colour photo of the surviving 44 kiloton Plumbbob-Smoky nuclear tower burst tower in Nevada has been published:



The significance of the tower remains is that they were not vaporized by the heat of the 44 kt explosion, 700 feet above the ground. For Hiroshima and Nagasaki,

where the yields were smaller and the burst heights larger, no buildings were vaporized at all. For a detailed description of this, see Plumbbob weapon test report

WT-1488, page 59:

"Observations of the remains of towers and shielding material after detonation at several ground zeros indicate that large masses of material are not

vaporized. Observation of the residue of the Smoky tower indicated that a very significant portion of that tower remained including the upper 200 feet

of steel. Another example similar to Shot Smoky was Shot Apple II, Teapot Series. Even though the total yield of Shot Apple II was about 32 kt, the

floor of the cab and the main tower support columns remained intact. The results of the [11 kt] Shot Fizeau tower melt studies (Reference 3) show that

about 85 percent of tower material was accounted for after the detonation and that only the upper 50 feet of tower was vaporized . No melting occurred

beyond 175 feet from the top of the tower although the fireball theoretically engulfed more than 400 feet of the tower."

Capabilities of Nuclear Weapons 1964 proves this by the following graph showing the small surface ablation of various metal spheres placed within 400 feet from the

23 kt Teapot-Met nuclear test in 1955:



29 kt Teapot-Apple 2 nuclear test house survived 1955 shot and remains in Nevada today, 60 years later.

J. E. Kester and R. B. Ferguson, Operation Teapot, Project 5.4, Evaluation of Fireball Lethality Using Basic Missile Structures



Much of the 29 kt Teapot Apple 2 bomb support tower 500 ft high was neither vaporized nor melted, nor was lethally radioactive!

J. E. Kester and R. B. Ferguson report in Operation Teapot, Project 5.4, Evaluation of Fireball Lethality Using Basic Missile Structures, WT-1134

(originally Secret Restricted Data), AD0340137, that within the 23 kt Teapot-Met (Nevada, 15 April 1955, 400 ft steel bomb tower) although the

bomb test steel tower was blown down, it was not vaporized and much survived despite having been engulfed by the fireball itself, as stated on page 30:

... nearly 225 feet of the main support members of the shot tower were still intact and laid out radially from their original position.

Page 116 of WT-1134 states that after the 2 kt Moth shot atop a 300 foot triangular tower on 22 February 1955: The three tower legs were laid out

approximately radially from their pre-shot positions. The longest tower leg found was about 200 ft long. The other two legs appeared to be about 150 ft

long. All three guy cables were still attached ... A few large pieces of the tower, about 20 to 30-ft long, were strewn to ranges of about 200 feet. It adds

that after the 7 kt Tesla shot atop a 300 ft square tower on 1 March 1955: the four tower legs ... were laid out radially from their original position ...



The tower legs remained intact to lengths of about 125 feet. All four guy cables were still attached ... The 43 kt Turk nuclear test was fired atop a 500

ft square tower, leaving 100 ft lengths of tower lengths on the gr

hiroshima and nagasaki effects evidence, debunking propaganda and radiophobia

Documents